June 2, 2011

Romney’s announcement was a marked contrast to his presidential rollout four years ago. Then, he delivered a soaring speech before some 800 supporters at the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, Mich., that covered an array of issues from jihadism to American ingenuity. Then he flew by private jet to campaign in Iowa, New Hampshire and Florida before staging a major fundraiser in his hometown of Boston.

This time, Romney aimed for a lower-key rollout, with a simple gathering on a rolling hayfield in New Hampshire.... Tickets to the kickoff event say, “A Cookout with Mitt & Ann,” and indeed campaign volunteers were serving his wife Ann Romney’s favorite chili recipe from a line of crockpots.

52 comments:

And, as someone who used to subscribe to the NYTimes. And, I also remember how on Saturday nights, along Broadway, you could see stacks and stacks of "sections" being tossed together for Sunday's sales. Meaning lots of New Yorkers, stopping for bagels at Zabar's, also lugged these papers home ...

There is a real Mitt Romney! If we can only learn to appreciate the value of his poker face in politics, then we can see his superior skill in not letting on where he stands on issues, nor letting on how long he will stand for them this time. That is a talent seldom seen apart from certain statues of great men.

Regardless of Romneycare, and assuming we are still in economic doldrums, the candidate that's going to beat President Obama is the one that's not going to play the "nice guy". This administration has provided ample ammunition, usually in their own actions and words, to a willing attacker. A GOP candidate that can do that has a good shot at winning.

I don't know if Romney is capable of that, but his speech yesterday seemed to imply he's got the message.

I checked out his website and he is saying the things I wanted to hear, so that is at least prudent. It is difficult for me to get too excited about the primary because anyone running would be such a huge improvement. The most impressive thing I know about Romeny is that he is not Obama. And that may be enough!

In any case, he can't live down RomneyCare and, as Scott M noted, it's going to take somebody a lot less whitebread to go after Mr "Get in their faces, punch back twice as hard", Dr Evil, and their soulless minions.

"I don't see how Romney can survive his continuing defense of RomneyCare."

Me neither. As I understand his argument, it's that the federal government doesn't have the right to impose RobamaCare but a state does. That argument is a distraction at best.

Romney will have to answer the question, "is ObamaCare a good idea?" If his answer is Yes, he loses the conservative vote. If his answer is No, then the next question is why are you continuing to defend RomneyCare?

Unfortunately, I think he's as far right as the electorate as a whole has the guts to go. Too many years of indoctrination in overwhelmingly liberal schools, media and culture.

This country has one all encompassing problem: it does not have enough people who understand the power, and beauty of free markets. It never really did, but at one time it was what we were, even if we didn't understand it, we acted like we did. We were busy being a free market; growing, building, expanding. We knew we didn't like or need being told what to do by far away strangers, and they didn't have the means to force us.

Now they don't need to force us. They have voters who who will only choose between a liberal and a liberal called a conservative. Mitt seems to be a nice man, but he is no revolutionary, and that's what we need. Our problems are too big and deep to fix by choosing between acupuncture or aroma therapy, but that's what we will do.

Althouse's plan to let Obama show what Democrats do with all the power did show us that, but most people consider the alternative to be a Republican, but that's really not an alternative - it's just a party designation. Obama's damage on top of all that came before it will not get fixed, the best we will do is slightly Mittigate it.

I do feel a bit sorry for him, at least right now. He would have done better with the financial crisis than either Obama or McCain. He is smarter than both, and probably would have been a better President than either.

But, McCain was the Republican nominee, and he lost to Obama.

If this had been a normal election cycle, then Romney would have had a good chance against Obama. BUT, it isn't. Romney has RomneyCare to his name, and a record of being a bit too willing to spend government money and to flip-flop on issues.

Maybe he could win, if he were to get the nomination. But I just don't see all that many Republicans this time around backing him. Sure, the party elite. But, they have less power these days, esp. after giving us McCain, Dole, etc.

I supported Romney in the 2008 presidential primary but in the 2012 primary he’s going to be running as the guy who lost to the guy who lost to Obama.

Also while I’m somewhat sympathetic to the federalism argument as well as the argument that Commonwealth Care may have been an improvement over what Massachusetts had before (e.g. fewer benefit mandates, exchanges that were more market-oriented, etc.), I’m afraid that on the surface it looks too much like Obamacare for him to be very effective in making the case for its repeal.

That being said, I think that based on his executive experience, he could be a very effective president. I just think he has too many handicaps to get the chance.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I think Mitt has an argument that it's okay for a state to enact healthcare, right or wrong, because it was voted in by the state's legislature, which has a read on its own population. Kind of like you have to pay taxes in your own school district, federalism, etc.

We can like Palin, or like Romney, or like T-paw, or like Cain. It is fun to pick the flavor we like most at Baskin-Robbins. But we are in for the win, so we must pick a candidate that takes it at Obama and fights to the election day not handicapped by a fear of being cast as a racist white man. So far Palin is all that we have who is in warrior mode and ready to beat Obama. Cain could also do well, but his lack of experience is a bridge too far.

He should have said Romneycare might be fine for Mass, but not for other 56 states, and more importantly, health care was a state issue, not a federal govt's responsibility, then he would be free. But he doubled down, and sounded really stupid. Everyone except the union bosses, and may be Weiner, knows Obama fails, but no one wants to see the failure repeated under Romney.

TeaPartiers would rather skewer Obama the next four years than defend an Obama-light. The days that he may be an sob, but he is our sob is over. Republicans want no sob.

Original Mike...Rush today pointed out the problem that Mittens causes himself. Romney will not attack Obama as the man who is causing disasterous problems. Romney will only point out that there have been mistakes in Obama's policies. Voters can forgive Obama for mistakes and let him try harder next time. Voters need to face a very real need to remove Obama because Obama is intentionally harming our economy and thereby intentionally harming our military. Obama has not made mistakes.

McCain was a Maverick for seven years 2001-2008, constantly stabbing Bush and the Repubs in the back, reaching across the aisle to give Ted Kennedy back-rubs, voting against Tax cuts, pushing Amnesty, and generally being the darling of the Liberal New York Times.

And he got nominated. Because he was next in line.

Never underestimate the stupidity of the Republicans. Romney will be nominated in 2012, its his turn, and he's the closest thing in 2011 to Jerry Ford - the Republicans dream.

A) A near perfect example of how to determine how people feel on a a subject without injecting a scintilla of bias. It could stand as an example of perhaps the most bias-free poll in modern polling history. I am in no way an idiot for choosing this option.

B) An biased poll in which Ann's preferred choice was embarrassingly clear.

C) A clever poll designed to prompt thoughtful consideration of the subject that was unfortunately too narrowly constructed to reflect my feelings on the matter.